Expert thought

All this past year the CEMES foundation worked on a scholarly project, which examined the Ukrainian crisis from a theological, historical and canonical perspective, always in relation to the triptych: Primacy-Conciliarity-Autocephaly.

The Church of Greece came close to formalizing legal relations with the OCU. The couple has already tried to live together, household claims have not arisen, and now, finally, they are preparing to get a stamp in the passport.

Latest photos and video

Religious Studies

In the context of recent events in the Orthodox world, disputes over the boundaries of church institutions often arise between the Patriarchate of Constantinople, Kyiv and Moscow. Ukraine accuses Russia of misappropriating the territory of the Kyiv Metropolis. In its turn, Moscow appeals to the fact that the ancient Kyiv Metropolis differs from the territory of modern Ukraine. RISU decided to clarify this topic, getting advice from historians. Based on this research, we prepared an infographic.

The first question that arises concerning Ukraine is this: with what right and based on which holy canons, does Russia today claim the ecclesiastical and administrative dependency of the Metropolis of Kyiv?

The Moscow "papacy"?

Archbishop Yevstratii Zorya

On 19/09 the chief of the Moscow church diplomacy Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeev visited the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew at his residence at Phanar. According to Greek sources during his visit, he conveyed the invitation of Russian Patriarch Kirill to visit Moscow in December on the occasion of the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the Local Council of 1917-18 and the restoration in the ROC the Patriarchy. The parties also discussed in detail the Great Council on Crete and "other bilateral and inter-Orthodox" issues.

At the same time, the official website of the diplomatic department of the MP does not say anything about the invitation to Moscow, nor about the content of the talks.

What can mean one thing - the parties have not agreed.

Indirectly, this is confirmed by Greek sources, pointing out that the Synod must discuss the issue of the visit.

What is really behind these few facts?

1. Moscow is still trading around the Cretan Council. Understanding its exceptional importance for the Ecumenical Patriarch (as the Primate and as an individual, because this is in fact the main theme of his patriarchate), the MP seeks to negotiate the most important thing: in exchange for joining the decisions of the Council to receive a guarantee of non-recognition of the autocephaly of the Church in Ukraine. Phanar contrary - trying to get recognition of the decisions of the Council without tying hands in the "Ukrainian issue". After all, this scenario was already in 2008-2016, and it ended with a deceit from Moscow, an attempt to disrupt the Council and non-recognition of its decisions. Therefore, Phanar has no reason to trust the MP now.

2. If the parties agreed, having a "big deal" "Ukraine in exchange for the Council," it would have already been reported about the visit of Patriarch Bartholomew to Russia. Therefore, there is no agreement, which explains the stinginess of the message from the MP.

3. And most important. It is obvious that Patriarch Kirill by playing around the recognition of the decisions of the Council actually tries to put himself in the role of the "Moscow pope". After all, it is known that in the Western tradition of interpreting the conciliar mechanisms it is considered that it is the sanction of the Roman pontiff that gives the decision of the Councils the ultimate legitimacy. So wants to do Kirill - if he will agree to the decisions of the Great Council of 2016, then together with this he try to show that without the sanction of Moscow the conciliar decisions can not enter into force. That is, in fact, he wants to establish for himself the primacy that historically belongs to Constantinople. I hope that Phanar understands what "Trojan horse" the MP wants to give them.

4. Well, the very nice occasion for the visit (the 100th anniversary of the restoration of the Patriarchate) should remind Phanar of another "beautiful occasion" - the 500th anniversary of the autocephaly of the ROC and the attempt of Stalin and the MP at that date in 1948 to hold in Moscow its own "Ecumenical Council ". And the fact that Patriarch Kirill is preparing his "Pan-Orthodox Council" is quite obvious for me.